Madam, - While I agree with Niall Ó Tuathail (January 7th) that Ariel Sharon "oversaw some of the worse sectarian violence in world history", I cannot accept that he used his power to make unpopular decisions for the "greater good".
Mr Ó Tuathail may have misinterpreted Sharon's motives. While Sharon's unilateral disengagement from Gaza was generally welcomed internationally as a positive step for the "peace process", regrettably his motives stemmed from clever pragmatism and strategic self-interest from an Israeli perspective rather than concern for the Palestinian residents of Gaza.
The cost of maintaining a significant military presence in Gaza to protect a relatively small settler population was too high. With the Gaza withdrawal complete, Sharon was free to concentrate resources, both financial and military, on completing the separation barrier and enlarging the much bigger settlements in the West Bank. This would complete for Sharon the "facts on the ground", enlarging the de facto state of Israel to encompass East Jerusalem and large tracts of land on the West Bank, removing them from any future Palestinian state.
Demographics were also a motivating factor. Birth rates among Palestinians in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank are higher than those of Jews. An earlier vision of a "Greater Israel" incorporating all of the Occupied Territories in a single Israeli state would eventually lead to a Palestinian majority in such an entity. This was unacceptable to Sharon, so again pragmatism led to the unilateral disengagement from Gaza.
Yes, Ariel Sharon was not afraid to move away from old ways of thinking, but alas it was only to further Israeli interests to the detriment of the Palestinian people. - Yours, etc,
DAVID WHITE,
Stonebridge Avenue,
Clonsilla,
Dublin 15.